MT Encyclopedia Entry on Kenpo/Kempo
- Thread starter Bob Hubbard
- Start date
- Status
Seabrook
Black Belt
- Joined
- Jan 19, 2005
- Messages
- 621
- Reaction score
- 3
I am not sure who wrote that, but to be honest, there is a lot of information in there that is incorrect.
Jamie Seabrook
www.seabrook.gotkenpo.com
Jamie Seabrook
www.seabrook.gotkenpo.com
OP
- Thread Starter
- #3
Thats the nice thing about it, it can be modified. 
OP
- Thread Starter
- #4
The MartialTalk Martial Arts Encyclopedia (or wiki) is a community created/edited/expanded encyclopedia and semi-dictionary of the martial arts. It uses the same software as the Wikipedia but focuses on a more concentrated area. This allows us do be a bit more than the Wikipedia (which isn't a dictionary).
It differs from the MartialTalk Discussion Forums, in that it is a resource, not a forum. On a discussion board, you can play point-counter point, debate, etc. On the MTMAE the contents should conform to a preferably non-political 3rd person view. Anyone who registers can edit the entries. We work together building the entries, correcting and expanding each others comments. The key test all content there must pass are "credible", "verifiable" and "Neutral Point of View".
From the Wikipedia these are defined as:
Credible content is defined simply as "articles should use reliable published sources"
What is and is not credible is outlined in great detail here.
"Verifiability" in this context does not mean that editors are expected to verify whether, for example, the contents of a New York Times article are true. In fact, editors are strongly discouraged from conducting this kind of research, because original research may not be published in Wikipedia. Articles should contain only material that has been published by reputable or credible sources, regardless of whether individual editors view that material as true or false. As counter-intuitive as it may seem, the threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth. For that reason, it is vital that editors rely on good sources.
NPOV (Neutral Point Of View) is a fundamental Wikipedia principle which states that articles should be written from a neutral point of view, representing views fairly and without bias.
This is joined by the "No Original Research" clause.
Neither Wikipedia nor the MTMAE are the place for original research. Citing sources and avoiding original research are inextricably linked: the only way to show that you are not doing original research is to cite sources who discuss material that is directly related to the article, and to stick closely to what those sources say.
Original research is a term used on Wikipedia to refer to material added to articles by Wikipedia editors that has not been published already by a reputable source. In this context it means unpublished theories, data, statements, concepts, arguments, and ideas; or any new interpretation, analysis, or synthesis of published data, statements, concepts, arguments that, in the words of Wikipedia's founder Jimbo Wales, would amount to a "novel narrative or historical interpretation".
It differs from the MartialTalk Discussion Forums, in that it is a resource, not a forum. On a discussion board, you can play point-counter point, debate, etc. On the MTMAE the contents should conform to a preferably non-political 3rd person view. Anyone who registers can edit the entries. We work together building the entries, correcting and expanding each others comments. The key test all content there must pass are "credible", "verifiable" and "Neutral Point of View".
From the Wikipedia these are defined as:
Credible content is defined simply as "articles should use reliable published sources"
What is and is not credible is outlined in great detail here.
"Verifiability" in this context does not mean that editors are expected to verify whether, for example, the contents of a New York Times article are true. In fact, editors are strongly discouraged from conducting this kind of research, because original research may not be published in Wikipedia. Articles should contain only material that has been published by reputable or credible sources, regardless of whether individual editors view that material as true or false. As counter-intuitive as it may seem, the threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth. For that reason, it is vital that editors rely on good sources.
NPOV (Neutral Point Of View) is a fundamental Wikipedia principle which states that articles should be written from a neutral point of view, representing views fairly and without bias.
This is joined by the "No Original Research" clause.
Neither Wikipedia nor the MTMAE are the place for original research. Citing sources and avoiding original research are inextricably linked: the only way to show that you are not doing original research is to cite sources who discuss material that is directly related to the article, and to stick closely to what those sources say.
Original research is a term used on Wikipedia to refer to material added to articles by Wikipedia editors that has not been published already by a reputable source. In this context it means unpublished theories, data, statements, concepts, arguments, and ideas; or any new interpretation, analysis, or synthesis of published data, statements, concepts, arguments that, in the words of Wikipedia's founder Jimbo Wales, would amount to a "novel narrative or historical interpretation".
BlackCatBonz
Master Black Belt
i have a question, bob.
on this particular entry.....i too, agree that there is a lot of misinformation there.
a lot of the info in this particular entry is not contained in any reputable, previously researched source.
it simply seems to be a collection of the usual drivel that people talk about, that has no basis in fact....or in previously written works.
while there is a lot of speculation as to the origins of james mitose's kempo.....nothing has come to light that proves it wrong......sure there is reasonable doubt and doubters......but not all people think its a "complete" farce. there are elements of truth hidden in there.
this particular entry contains no cited resources.
so......with that long preface.
would citing Mitose's own books as a reference for the art of kempo be out of line?
he was in fact considered the expert on the subject until people started to have problems, either real or imagined ones, with him.
on this particular entry.....i too, agree that there is a lot of misinformation there.
a lot of the info in this particular entry is not contained in any reputable, previously researched source.
it simply seems to be a collection of the usual drivel that people talk about, that has no basis in fact....or in previously written works.
while there is a lot of speculation as to the origins of james mitose's kempo.....nothing has come to light that proves it wrong......sure there is reasonable doubt and doubters......but not all people think its a "complete" farce. there are elements of truth hidden in there.
this particular entry contains no cited resources.
so......with that long preface.
would citing Mitose's own books as a reference for the art of kempo be out of line?
he was in fact considered the expert on the subject until people started to have problems, either real or imagined ones, with him.
That's certainly a source, and I think it's proper to use it/them. But it'd be nice to have an independent, second source.
It may be that the best that can be done is to describe the current controversy over the history.
It may be that the best that can be done is to describe the current controversy over the history.
OP
- Thread Starter
- #7
The idea is to have verifiable stuff, with the references, citations, etc. As his works were published, I'm pretty certain they are a citable source. Also, as Arni said, having it validated by an independent verifiable source is also good.
I think the Kenpo in the West part could do for a complete re-write. It's the original one from Wikipedia.
It should probably be called Hawaiin Kenpo Lineage, or something like that. I personally feel it was originally writen by a traditional stylist, as there are a lot of assumptions from a limited experience of Kenpo.
I'll see if I can come up with something a little better that shows both sides.
Side Note:
Bob, I am glad you started this as I've played with the idea myself for a couple of years now. Just never found the time. The reason I never did this is the logistics of keeping track of everything that someone could change.
For example, I was the one that originally put a list up of some of the styles. Then other people came along and started adding links to their sites. I personally feel that it is not optimal for people to link to sites, but should link to internal articles. You may want to consider making some rules about this. People should not use the Martialpedia to generate traffic for their site.
Anyways, I would like to see this project become a success. As such, if you requre any help, I would like to offer it. Be it as a mod or what have you.
It should probably be called Hawaiin Kenpo Lineage, or something like that. I personally feel it was originally writen by a traditional stylist, as there are a lot of assumptions from a limited experience of Kenpo.
I'll see if I can come up with something a little better that shows both sides.
Side Note:
Bob, I am glad you started this as I've played with the idea myself for a couple of years now. Just never found the time. The reason I never did this is the logistics of keeping track of everything that someone could change.
For example, I was the one that originally put a list up of some of the styles. Then other people came along and started adding links to their sites. I personally feel that it is not optimal for people to link to sites, but should link to internal articles. You may want to consider making some rules about this. People should not use the Martialpedia to generate traffic for their site.
Anyways, I would like to see this project become a success. As such, if you requre any help, I would like to offer it. Be it as a mod or what have you.
OP
- Thread Starter
- #9
Zoran, all the help is greatly appreciated. I'll be bumping up more people to sysop level once things start moving. As to the entries, it's all up for revision.
Palusut's the one who kept suggesting the project. I just installed the software and mirrored some entries.
Palusut's the one who kept suggesting the project. I just installed the software and mirrored some entries.
BlackCatBonz
Master Black Belt
thats the funny thing about any discussion of mitose.......anything other than the stuff that he has written is all hearsay.....nothing has been proven or disporven.
there are some actual facts....but there are also a bunch of half baked theories and wishful thoughts as to the origins of what it is he taught.
there are some actual facts....but there are also a bunch of half baked theories and wishful thoughts as to the origins of what it is he taught.
Eye of the Storm
White Belt
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2006
- Messages
- 2
- Reaction score
- 0
Hello everyone,
I'm glad to see the interst in the Kenpo History. I've studied Kenpo for the past 25 years. I also have been intrested in the history of the late GGM Mitose. My lineage is from Great Grandmaster Ralph Castro, my teacher is Grandmaster Richard Alameny
I myself take the good with the bad. we are all here to learn what works for us. It dosen't mater that Mitose was the Best or just good. What maters is that He got the ball rolling so we can be the best we can be, and all the defferent styles that has come from this begining. we can all enjoy and benifit from. I encorage everyone to seek there own truth in themself. Keep up all great info. I enjoy this site, no bickering, just good sharing of knowlage and fellowship.
I'm glad to see the interst in the Kenpo History. I've studied Kenpo for the past 25 years. I also have been intrested in the history of the late GGM Mitose. My lineage is from Great Grandmaster Ralph Castro, my teacher is Grandmaster Richard Alameny
I myself take the good with the bad. we are all here to learn what works for us. It dosen't mater that Mitose was the Best or just good. What maters is that He got the ball rolling so we can be the best we can be, and all the defferent styles that has come from this begining. we can all enjoy and benifit from. I encorage everyone to seek there own truth in themself. Keep up all great info. I enjoy this site, no bickering, just good sharing of knowlage and fellowship.
kidswarrior
Senior Master
Interesting, Bob. I look forward to exploring and maybe interacting with this valuable resource.
I was under the impression that Kenpo/ Kempo was an Okinawan term, not Japanese. I thought it was the the Okinawan translation of the characters for the Chinese Quan Fa (Chuan Fa).
Can anyone clarify?
--Dave
Can anyone clarify?
--Dave
Nope. It's a japanese word. Okinawan laguages are dialects or subsets of Japanese.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japonic_languages
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Okinawan_language
I have theory you all can feel free to shoot down, but it will be pretty hard to shake this opinion. The pronuncation of kenpo is an Ed Parker twist on the word Kempo. To Ken something in English is to understand it. So the word becomes an understanding of the fist. Law of the fist or Kempo means to understand the parameters defining(laws of motion and nature) or in short that paricular understanding; hence, all the kempo varaitions or ways of thinking. In other words its all the Sam Ting.
sean
sean
Okay, I'll shoot it down. :shock:
Nice theory. Except Kenpo is not an Parker twist. As I understand it, Chow used Kenpo and later changed it to Kempo. I believe Parker spelled it the way he was taught to spell it from his instructor.
In either case, we do not have the alphabet to be able to simulate the pronounciation of Japanese words. We could have just as easily spelled it Kemho.
A mere flesh wound.
Sean
Well I guess we can have some fun with it.
Ken
noun: the range of vision
noun: range of what one can know or understand (Example: "Beyond my ken")
PO
noun: a European river; flows into the Adriatic Sea
noun: a noncommissioned officer in the navy with a rank comparable to sergeant in the army
noun: a radioactive metallic element that is similar to tellurium and bismuth; occurs in uranium ores but can be produced by bombarding bismuth with neutrons in a nuclear reactor
noun: an independent agency of the federal government responsible for mail delivery (and sometimes telecommunications) between individuals and businesses in the United States
I was going with the japanese fist action.:ultracoolWell I guess we can have some fun with it.
Ken
noun: the range of vision
noun: range of what one can know or understand (Example: "Beyond my ken")
PO
noun: a European river; flows into the Adriatic Sea
noun: a noncommissioned officer in the navy with a rank comparable to sergeant in the army
noun: a radioactive metallic element that is similar to tellurium and bismuth; occurs in uranium ores but can be produced by bombarding bismuth with neutrons in a nuclear reactor
noun: an independent agency of the federal government responsible for mail delivery (and sometimes telecommunications) between individuals and businesses in the United States
Hmmm that's not what it says here,
wikipedia said:
Also, I believe that there are a small number of Okinawans that actually speak the Okinawan language. The majority now speak Japanese, but they are definately two different languages.
--Dave
- Status
Similar threads
